Dr. Bruce Bayley
In April of this year, I wrote an article entitled “The code of ethics: Important guidelines or outdated document?” The intent of the piece was to not only discuss what my students and I had found concerning Codes of Ethics among the 167 agencies that were surveyed, but to also ask you, as officers in the field, how you feel about the importance of and need for a departmental Code of Ethics. The following are the preliminary results of your replies.
Basic Demographics
Of the 50 officers who replied, 68 percent were male and 32 percent female. The vast majority (90 percent) were Caucasian and geographically, the sample was fairly evenly distributed, with the largest number of respondents from California (11 percent), Florida, Illinois, and Texas respectively (9 percent). County and State departments accounted for 88 percent of the sample (44 percent each) and the average number of years in law enforcement/corrections was 16. When looking at rank among those who responded, 40 percent were line officers, 28 percent were Corporals/Sergeants, 22 percent were Lieutenants, and 10 percent were Captains or higher in rank.
Results
To begin the survey, officers were asked if their department had a Code of Ethics. Overall, 84 percent said yes, their department did have a Code, while 4 percent said no and the remaining 12 percent were unsure.
The second question was designed to gauge the accessibility of their departments’ Code of Ethics. Ninety (90) percent said the Code was easily accessible to agency personnel, but just over 25 percent identified the Code as being readily available to private citizens or Internet users.
Of particular interest was the issue of when or if officers signed a Code of Ethics (the question was not specific to their department, just any Code of Ethics – such as those found in many academies).
Only 2/3 or 66 percent of those surveyed had ever signed a Code of Ethics during their career. When asked where they were most likely to have signed a Code of Ethics, less than half (48 percent) indicated the academy as the primary location, followed by in-service training (22 percent), field/facility training after the academy (20 percent), and annual training (16 percent). In only two cases were officers asked to sign the Code in more than one location.
As many of the settings where a Code of Ethics was most likely to be signed centered on officer training, the next question asked respondents if the Code was integrated into their ethics instruction.
Unfortunately, just under 2/3 (64 percent) said yes, while 24 percent said no (12 percent were unsure).
While the first series of questions dealt primarily with departmental uses of the Code of Ethics, the next two questions focused entirely on individual officer perceptions. When asked how important the
Code of Ethics was to officers personally, eighty (80) percent believed the Code was very important, with 16 percent feeling it was somewhat important, followed by 4 percent who felt it was not important at all.
The final question allowed officers to express what they felt was the primary purpose for a Code of Ethics. Initially the responses appeared to be quite random and varied, but after careful review replies tended to group into one of five categories:
• Professional accountability
• Standards of behavior
• Discipline
• No purpose
• Unsure
Examples of officer comments from each category include:
• Professional accountability: “It operates as the basic guideline for all staff to follow since we are public servants. All of our actions are viewed by the citizens, whether they happen on or off duty. It is paramount to the Corrections community that we maintain the highest level of ethics.” “To remind staff that the public holds us to a higher standard.”
• Standards of behavior: “Establish a standard by which behavior can be modeled.” “It is a code by which a set of behaviors can be judged.”
• Discipline: “In the experience I am familiar with in my department it is a tool for discipline.”
• No purpose: “Serves no purpose, either you have Ethics or you don’t. A document is not needed to tell right from wrong.”
• Unsure: “I don’t know what purpose the code of ethics has.”
Conclusions
In the end, individual officers appeared to value the Code of Ethics more than their departments. While a vast majority of agencies did have a Code of Ethics and made these Codes available to their officers, a surprisingly low percentage appeared to place any value in the document by either having their officers sign the Code or at the very least, integrating those values and beliefs into their ethics training (where the Code should be a central focus if the ideals expressed in the document truly reflect the principles and attitudes of the department and its administration).
Fortunately, officers of all ranks appear to believe in the importance of having a Code of Ethics. It would be interesting to see if we would have more consensus on the primary purpose for the Code if agencies took a more proactive approach to integrating its values into all levels of training.
What do you think?
I’m still very interested in learning how you, the officers, feel about the need for and purpose of a Code of Ethics. To those who have already taken the survey, thank you. I appreciate the effort you took to share your thoughts. To those who haven’t yet had the opportunity (or the time), I would encourage you to please take a few moments and answer this brief questionnaire (only 13 questions). Your responses will not only help us to better understand the dynamics of this interesting document, but ultimately lead to more effective and useful ethics training.
(Note: if you’ve already completed the survey, please do not take it again) ‘
Thank you for your time and please be safe in all you do...
